The Court passed the judgment on the husband’s appeal seeking setting aside of Family Court’s 2023 decision to not grant him divorce.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently ruled that a husband’s unexplained relationship with another woman outside of marriage is considered cruelty towards his wife.
The case was heard by Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur, where the husband sought a divorce after his wife accused him of having an affair.
The Court noted that the husband admitted to knowing the woman and confirmed traveling with her several times by air and train.
“Though, the stand of the appellant-husband is that he had no illicit relations with said XXX, yet we find that maintaining relations with a lady outside the matrimonial alliance that too without any justified explanation, certainly amounts to cruelty and rather, the said fact is sufficient to cause ruptures in the matrimonial alliance of the parties,” it ruled.
The Court gave its judgment on the husband’s appeal, asking to overturn the Family Court’s 2023 decision to deny him a divorce.
The Hindu couple, married in 2011, has a child. The husband claimed his wife treated him and his family cruelly and said the accusations of an affair had harmed their marriage.
The wife, however, said she had once seen her husband with a woman in a park. When she asked him about it, he told her the woman worked at his company and that he planned to marry her.
The Court observed that, according to the family court’s findings, a compact disc (CD) showed the husband leaving a flat with a woman. It also noted that the husband had registered a company in both his and the woman’s name.
Dismissing the husband’s claim that there was no evidence against him, the Court stated,
“It has been admitted by the appellant (husband) that he had acquaintance with said XXX for a long time and that he had been travelling with her by air and train several times and he had even visited Goa with her. In our opinion, the admission of the appellant-husband regarding his relations with said XXX coupled with the position indicated in Ex.DA clearly shows that it was the appellant-husband, who had been the cause of disturbance in the matrimonial alliance of the parties.”
Therefore, the Court concluded that the husband’s behavior did not warrant any relief and rejected his appeal.
“We are conscious of the fact that parties have been residing separately since 2018, but it must be borne in mind that the instant case is not a fit case, where any indulgence can be granted to the appellant-husband, due to long separation, in view of the acts and conduct of the appellant-husband,” it added.
